Nice try yourself, benfiting soceity is of course a value to society. However the reverse doesn't have to hold true. As stated we value a lot of crap that doesn't benfit us for example tobacco and hard drugs. Also you have been using benfit with a moralistic tone. That tone is where the divide is. You think something has to do good to have value. It doesn't.

Wow, I'm really disappointed at this response. Not being a smartass, seriously disappointed. As I've read other threads over the past months I've respected your voice, typically clear and cuts through the bullshit.

Okay, let's go...

"Read my post again and ask yourself where I said you complained about tone"

Okay

"You want respectful replies? Then post in a respectful manner.Yeah SARCASM. You set the TONE, don't COMPLAIN now." (Emphasis mine)

That wasn't hard. It's unlike you to make these kinds of errors, from what I've seen.

Wrong. I explained the context. I even gave you a reason why it headed this direction. Again, you misunderstood the post.

A dissertation full of semantic word games

I hope you understand that you just argued "structured argument" vs professional then later typed:

You don't like to be challenged, so flame away. I would be interested in hearing the logical fallacies though.

Seriously, get out of my boat because the dissertation fits your comment. Also, I commented on a poorly worded argument, you introduced "professional" that's a logical fallacy. Do you know why?

Nice try yourself, benfiting soceity is of course a value to society. However the reverse doesn't have to hold true. As stated we value a lot of crap that doesn't benfit us for example tobacco and hard drugs. Also you have been using benfit with a moralistic tone. That tone is where the divide is. You think something has to do good to have value. It doesn't.

Change the goal posts all you want, your condescending statement was concise and direct, and totally refuted by your own words. We are talking about benefit to society. You have clearly established this point throughout the thread. It was the whole thrust of your IT tantrum that went on for post after post.

My initial 'snarky' point of whole neighborhoods that consist entirely of people who contribute more to society than you...every single resident. Can you refute it? Do you agree with it?

My 'almost coherent argument' on the societal worth of babies, which actually was a complete annihilation of your earlier point. Can you counter it?

What the hell, I'll even add in the Kiddie Porn example I gave you a pass on earlier...negative impact on society, positive income stream. How is this possible if the world works as you say?

Reinvent, reinterpret, redefine...you're blowing all the smoke you can, but you have no answers.

I can go through and list out all the times you've contradicted yourself in this thread as well if you like, just like the "Benefit v. Value" fiasco...there are plenty. Feel free to do the same for me if you can.

You're working theory is juvenile, and you lack the depth of understanding to defend it. You don't even understand the terms you're throwing around well enough to use them with consistent intent and meaning. Your initial argument of "potential income is a good measure of an individuals worth to society as driven by their contribution to it" is totally different to "people have messed up priorities and place value on worthless things".

Wrong. I explained the context. I even gave you a reason why it headed this direction. Again, you misunderstood the post.

I misunderstood nothing. You challenged me to find where you stated I was complaining about tone, and its clearly there. How it related to the direction of the discussion has no relevance to this portion of the response.

I hope you understand that you just argued "structured argument" vs professional then later typed:

Your critique was that the argument was poorly worded. I responded with a brief outline of the structure of my argument and the clarity of its message. Was there something about my statements that were unclear to you? Something you found difficult to understand? Because you haven't asked for any kind of clarification. I can assume that you got the point. The wording is at least adequate.

Seriously, get out of my boat because the dissertation fits your comment. Also, I commented on a poorly worded argument, you introduced "professional" that's a logical fallacy. Do you know why?

I made no LOGICAL connection between the wording of my statement and "professional", so no, there is no logical fallacy. I have no idea what standard you are applying for the classification of "poorly worded", so I simply indicated that I'm no professional writer, but I can present a coherent argument...which I then explained in unambiguous terms.

No "dissertation", no "semantic word games". My meaning has been clear from post to post to post. Check my comments to Goodlun. He can't say the same.

I made no LOGICAL connection between the wording of my statement and "professional", so no, there is no logical fallacy. I have no idea what standard you are applying for the classification of "poorly worded", so I simply indicated that I'm no professional writer, but I can present a coherent argument...which I then explained in unambiguous terms.

Okay, you do not understand what constitutes a logical fallacy cool.

No "dissertation", no "semantic word games". My meaning has been clear from post to post to post. Check my comments to Goodlun. He can't say the same.

Nope. I said it was worded poorly, I have said nothing about whether I agree or disagree with what you are attempting to address.

You are wrong about the "complaining about tone" issue, just flat out. You said it, then said you didn't and dared me to find it, so I quoted it for you.

Nope, you do not understand the post. I explained it you do not get it.

Can you give me specific examples of me "psychobabbling" or playing "semantic word games" in the posts in question?

Yep, this went over your head. For someone who keeps harping on snarkiness, you sure do miss it when it is directed at you. Basically, I insulted your profession and mine. Like I said, you do not get my post.

If you can't, that's a hell of a lot of misplaced and/or inaccurate rhetoric for a few short posts.

Oh I can, quite easily, but like you "I don't like to be challenged." So, it will be:
IiF: Example
YOU: Nuh unh.
Iif: Uh huh.
You: Nuh unh.
Oh LOL@Rhetoric. Everyone, including you is using it right now.

Your ability to generate money is directly related to what you provide society. We can get all touch feely and **** but at the end of the day it boils down to this. Its how we as a society place "value" now you can certainly argue about our fucked up priorities as a society with certain individuals but in the end it is how we as a society measure our access to resources and measure of what peoples time and the what not is worth.

Not all people are created equal I am sick of hearing that bullshit there are simply people who are better for society than others. How we treat those differences is a whole different argument.

Yep looks so different than what I am saying now about value you and ****. Those goal post sure the hell have moved a lot.

Originally Posted by Keslet

We are talking about benefit to society.

No we are talking about how peoples value is assessed by society. In large part this is done by the benefit they bring to society. It doesn't exclude other things one provides to society that may not be of benefit. IE a tobacco farmer. Can you really call cigarettes a benefit to society? They sure the hell have value in society and thus the tobacco farmer also have a value to society.
Further more this started with a paragraph to invoke thought not a 20 page disertation submitted to a journal. As such not every aspect of the thought was covered in detail. These are being covered and talked about as they are brought up. As such it is also a living theory if you will. I am not intellectually dishonest I am open to this theory evolving as evidence and arguments are presented. This is what makes it a debate.

Originally Posted by Keslet

It was the whole thrust of your IT tantrum that went on for post after post.

LOL, lets get this staright.
You come on here and see something you didn't like so you made a rambling post one that had 3 sets of dribble. The IT one was the closest you made to making an actual argument. In that argument you made a direct comparison of your position to that of IT Professionals. An argument that your cracker jack box credentials are why you should be value more by society vs that of your friends that make more. I responded in a frank manner. You continues with more egoistical bullshit. Yet I am the one who through a tantrum. Nice try don't confuse being frank and blunt with an emotional discharge.

Originally Posted by Keslet

My initial 'snarky' point of whole neighborhoods that consist entirely of people who contribute more to society than you...every single resident. Can you refute it? Do you agree with it?

This is better structured than your original statement (I won't call it a point or argument cause it wasn't)
Its still as silly for a number of reasons we can start with your choice of picking a 500K neighbor hood I live in San Diego County 500k homes are far from special. Lets address 500k cause its an interesting price real quick. Its a very attainable price if you have a dual income house especially if one or both of those incomes are from professionals. Out here you see a lot of multi-generational homes with 4 to 5 incomes to make the payments on a home. If my wife made 1/2 of what I make the mortgage on a 500k home would be quite comfortable vs being very tight.
But the dollar amount here isn't what is really important now is it. Lets talk about homes that I have no chance at if my wife worked or if we decided to save up. This is your point after all right? We have communities around here of multi million dollar homes and as I have made the transition to caring more about free time than earning money I am fairly certain I will never again live in that bracket.
So lets answer your silly question one that has been answered before several times in this thread of course I think they contribute more to society than I do. How is this a surprise especially after your honey boo boo example? Or even after 1/2 the quote blocks of me you just used?
I have no issue with acknowledging that there are people, a lot of people who are more valued by society than I am. This has been stated. So there is no point to this question. It doesn't prove or provide a counter point unless your saying that you think I am worth more or equal to them.

Originally Posted by Keslet

My 'almost coherent argument' on the societal worth of babies, which actually was a complete annihilation of your earlier point. Can you counter it?

Far from annihilating anything. It was a fairly ok point. Not even a particularly strong one. The best you can pull out of it is this. Society has some features that it gives equal access to. Not something I have disbuted. The police show up to the door of anyone the same no matter what value we put on them as a society. They may show up faster in a nicer area. But they show up none the less. So yes if a kid goes out into traffic we don't just run them over for convince sake we don't do that for adults either. If anyone gets trapped in a well we will help them not just babies. So society steps up for some emergencies irregardless of the value we place on the person. Hell we spend 40k per prison per year. We certainly don't value them highly but we believe in keeping them segregated from us and doing so in a semi-humane way.

If you where better at debating we certainly could have gone on to debate the various different emergencies society does and doesn't step in for and how when and why we draw the lines.

My point on Babies remain though mostly of value to their families. You can tell because the expectations and responsibility for them fall on them not society as a whole. If my daughter needs new shoes it comes out of my pocket. If she needs to eat out of my pocket, needs to see the Dr. out of my pocket. I of course have no issue with this as she is of tremendous value to me. I am just not going to kid myself into thinking that you are going to step in to help her.

Originally Posted by Keslet

What the hell, I'll even add in the Kiddie Porn example I gave you a pass on earlier...negative impact on society, positive income stream. How is this possible if the world works as you say?

Make sure to use Hitler for your next example.
Already stated when we get into this realm of illegitimate income we need to start getting into caveats and addendum this particular rabbit hole I am not going to go down though.

Originally Posted by Keslet

Reinvent, reinterpret, redefine...you're blowing all the smoke you can, but you have no answers.

Awww cute care to back that up with clear examples? Oh wait just below you offer to do that, why don't you go ahead. Just be careful as you seem to have a difficult time with subtle distinctions.

Originally Posted by Keslet

I can go through and list out all the times you've contradicted yourself in this thread as well if you like, just like the "Benefit v. Value" fiasco...there are plenty.

Fiasco in your own mind.

Originally Posted by Keslet

Your initial argument of "potential income is a good measure of an individuals worth to society as driven by their contribution to it" is totally different to "people have messed up priorities and place value on worthless things".

The fact that you see those two thoughts as mutually exclusive means you have no clue as to what I have been talking about this whole time. It means you have failed to understand me in the same way you have failed to understand IIF.
Society is certainly capable of setting a value to something and I am capable of thinking that value is not correct. Back to your Honey Boo Boo example I can not for the life of me come up with a reason why millions of people watch her. Why they place any sort of value in her. But they do. I can't imagine why so many people give a **** about what various celebrities are up to but guess what they do give a ****. Celebrities are a part of our society and who they are fucking and what they are doing seems to be a big fucking deal. I don't like these facts I think it shows our fucked priorities as a people as a whole but me not liking it doesn't change the fact that this **** is what our society values.

Okay, totally different question...is there anyway to get a post back that had been auto-saving then disappeared? My connection timed out and it just went away when I tried to post it...

I am not an expert on Vbulletin but my best guess would be the post is gone in any practical sense. Could a computer forensics team go and get it if they access right now maybe? I would think that your new post would write over the memory address that was being used to save the contents of your old post.

I am not an expert on Vbulletin but my best guess would be the post is gone in any practical sense. Could a computer forensics team go and get it if they access right now maybe? I would think that your new post would write over the memory address that was being used to save the contents of your old post.

I expect your right...I was trying to think of some way to ask for advice without overwriting anything that might still be cached, but I was pretty sure it was going to be a lost cause. Thanks for the suggestion though.

Well, that sucks...I had written up a very long and detailed response that had some good stuff in it (if i do say so myself)...I'm sure as heck not going to start from scratch to recreate that monster. On the other hand, these posts have been getting long as hell, which doesn't always make for the greatest communication in a forum format. Maybe it's for the best...at least you guys are spared another massive wall o' text...

Okay, gotta make dinner for my son, than I might try a different tack on this...